Sex Matters seeks to appeal in Hampstead Ponds case

Sex Matters has lodged our application for permission to appeal in the Hampstead Ponds case against the City of London Corporation. You can read our application to appeal.

The case was turned down on procedural grounds that we, and our legal team, believe are wrong in law.

We didn’t get as far as being able to make substantive arguments on why the City of London’s policy of allowing men who identify as women into the women’s bathing pond and the meadow, changing room and showers is unlawful.

The procedural points on which we lost are these:

1. The High Court said we did not have standing. It said a “more appropriate” claimant would be an individual woman facing discrimination and harassment at the ponds (and that an individual should bring a claim to the County Court). This is wrong in law – the test is not whether the claimant is the “most appropriate person” to bring a claim but whether they have a sufficient interest. Protecting single-sex services and sex-based rights is core to Sex Matters’ mandate as a charity. It is common for charities to bring such claims.

2. The court also said that the case was out of time (because the City of London first set a self-ID policy in 2019) and premature (because it is now undergoing a consultation about adopting a new policy). We say this is wrong. The City of London did in fact change its policy in July 2025 following the Supreme Court judgment (from an earlier “gender-identity policy” that included “genderfluid, gender queer or non-binary” individuals to the present one allowing entry to “trans women with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment”). It withdrew the old policy. Adopting this new, more recent policy and putting up signage was a decision which we say is in time for judicial review.

Our lawyers think that each of these points is challengeable and can be won.

We say the City of London took an unlawful decision in July 2025 when it put up new signs following the Supreme Court judgment saying that:

“The Ladies’ Pond is open to biological women and trans women with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.”

This was a different policy from the one the City of London adopted in 2019, which was a “presumption of inclusivity” including “genderfluid, gender queer or non-binary” people. The City of London’s Committee took a decision in July 2025 about the way the Ponds would operate following the Supreme Court judgment.

Maya Forstater, CEO of Sex Matters, said:

“We have taken on the might of the City of London Corporation because we believe its approach is a clear example of an unlawful policy. Kenwood Ladies’ Pond is an iconic battleground for campaigners for women’s sex-based rights. Getting a judgment in this case would provide a template for other single-sex services, and show that service providers cannot get away with ignoring the law.”

As part of bringing the case we collected statements from dozens of women who use the ponds, describing how the policy of allowing men into the ladies’ pond and associated changing facilities affected them.

The City of London expects women and girls using open showers to share that space with men who identify as transgender women (or who say they do). Many women told us how humiliating and terrifying this is, and why they cannot bring their own cases.

The consultation that the City of London has undertaken offered several options that are not lawful. It was designed so that it could be “hijacked” and it was. It is not credible that over 30,000 people who all swim at the ponds, 60% of whom are LGB, answered the consultation.

In any case the City of London must have a policy that follows the Equality Act.